Let me re post my videos to show you my results and trust me there is more mounting pressure then even intel recommends.

Click to expand...

I'm unsure so I'm gonna remove the paste. It's not only one sheep btw. You should know coz you've been hanging around the thread for quite some time. I spent my hard earned money on the hardware so I have every right to use whatever paste I want. Just like what I said. I don't want to risk it.

I've unsucribed from this thread. This thread has swayed waay to the left

later ppl and best of luck.

Click to expand...

WE GET IT. No damage to your stuff, which is great. But some people have had strange experiences with this paste. Those dips in natr0n's (and others) heatsink didn't appear by magic. There is something going on, but I think arcturas is on the right track: Do these users have anything in common, aside from the paste?

I thought people would benefit from both an understanding of 'how' to remove ICD and irrefutable proof that IC Diamond does not damage the IHS markings.

A test model was developed to demonstrate a worst case contact scenario of a high pressure heat sink/IHS mount with IC Diamond as the interface material against surface coating fragile enough to be an indicator of surface polishing under extreme conditions

For a demonstration to prove that IC Diamond does not damage IHS markings we needed a surface coating/finish that was much thinner than the 1 or 2 micron lettering found on Intel and AMD IHS. A number of potential candidates were ruled out. Paint was no good as it reacted to solvents on a clean up and was too thick thinner, non reactive coatings Like AR (anti reflective) and anodized aluminum while thin enough, were too hard for an adequate comparison.

We finally settled on an oxidized copper sheet. Copper oxidation growth in an open, natural, rural weather environment proceeds at a very slow rate of perhaps .5 microns a year . So on some copper sheet that's been sitting around in our lab a couple of years and in an interior , air - conditioned environment, you can anticipate oxide growth to be 1/10 of an exterior exposure. We had the ideal situation, oxidized copper with a coating of .1 to .2 microns. and with IHS serial markings that have a estimated thickness of just 1 to 2 microns, the copper oxide coating represents approx 10-20 % the thickness of the the manufacturer serial markings, Additionally is soft enough to polish back to its original shine with nothing more abrasive than a finger, in less than 5 seconds.

The test set up simulates application of IC Diamond on a contact area approximately equal to to an IHS on a 5 X 5 inch oxidized copper sheet.

The copper oxide simulates, at a lower extreme, the 1-2 micron thickness of manufacturers serial markings which are 80 to 90% thicker by comparison to the oxide surface finish.

The 30mm X 3mm thick copper block is to model base heat sink contact to which the IC diamond compound is applied.

IC Diamond is then applied to the 30mm square modeled heat sink base and clamped with the spring clamps to the test piece a together at the maximum clamp jaw extension of close to 2 inches to the scale to simulate what you would experience with a heat sink and IHS contacted under pressure with IC Diamond as an interface.

Test notes:

This test case represents an extreme worst case scenario, room temperature, copper oxide surface finishes are very different from high temperature thermally generated ones and are easily marked with sub copper MOHS (3) hard materials like a fingernail, paper, piece of wood, etc.

Close up view of the test area to note prior to the test pre existing scuffs and scratches

Application of Compound – note process mark

With the pony Clamps applied, a pressure of 79lbs (4lbs higher than Intel max board load specification) is in place and compound can be seen to be squeezed out the sides.

Disassembled test -slight finish smear under the #1 process mark when applying the first clamp the piece moved.

Compound re-liquefied with acetone.

Compound removal

Solvents in thermal compound removal are used to replace and/or ease mechanical action required to remove a material that has good mechanical adhesion (good mechanical contact = good thermal transfer).

Most thermal compounds have exactly the same primary ingredient ( Aluminum oxide) as a lapping compound or sandpaper (Aluminum oxide), while diamond is hard (MOHS 10) it is only incrementally so, aluminum oxide (mohs 9) is actually the preferred cutting agent used by the glass industry. According to these products MSDS's Shin Etsu, AS5, MX4 etc. all contain significant %'s of aluminum oxide.

Despite the highly abrasive nature of these materials when correctly applied and removed no issues should be encountered. Countless how-to videos have been observed by Innovation Cooling where the presenter squirts out some cleaning agent and then begins to vigorously scrub the piece much like they cleaning a frying pan. This clearly shows a lack of understanding of basic, common shop practice.

Good shop practice is to let the solvent do the mechanical work to re-liquefy and remove the compound as above by blotting with a solvent saturated paper towel till compound is fully dissolved . Once dissolved, the compound is lifted or loosened from the contact surface *and easily removed with a single wipe or two without abrasion. This works with even the hardest most dried out compound it just requires a little more patience.

Below is the cleaned piece with no evidence of any marking or damage to the .1-.2 micron thick surface

Note that the surface is so thin and delicate that nothing more abrasive than a finger can polish it back to it's original shine in under 5 seconds

Summary Conclusion

Under extreme conditions the test performed here was above the manufacturer's maximum load specifications on a material much softer than manufacturer's serial markings on an IHS (as an at home test try removing the markings on your CPU with finger abrasion) and on the order of 10-20% of the thickness of typical IHS markings.

Final test result showed no scratches, no polishing and no visible abrasion of any kind.

When the compound is properly applied and removed, the typical high end user will experience zero problems with multiple heat sink mounts and dismounts independent of any external mechanical factors not related to recommended thermal compound application and removal procedure.

I would note that demonstrations of proper removal were performed here by one moar in his live video and FullFusion in his video posted earlier in the thread where they encountered no problems and are great examples of how to do it properly and are referenced here for those that need instruction.

I just cleaned my comp and put fresh paste I looked at my heatsink after cleaning and it has tiny pits on it now from the previous Ic Diamond application.I'm pretty upset about this. Never have I ever experienced any thermal paste issues in my many years in this field.

Click to expand...

It's up to you now to prove that IC Diamond was the cause now you have made the claim. Let's send your compound directly to a material analysis company and we will post the results here. On my shipping account.

Any pictures of mirror damage on you IHS?

Send your sink to me for analysis on my shipping account for analysis and I will replace it even though IC Diamond was not the cause of your damage.

It's up to you now to prove that IC Diamond was the cause now you have made the claim. Let's send your compound directly to a material analysis company and we will post the results here. On my shipping account.

Any pictures of mirror damage on you IHS?

Send your sink to me for analysis on my shipping account for analysis and I will replace it even though IC Diamond was not the cause of your damage.

Click to expand...

I have to take pic of ihs when I reapply some other paste when arrives this week. I left it in the socket when I cleaned it. I will look.

I have a feeling your formulation uses Boric acid and that is the cause of these issues for some.

It's up to you now to prove that IC Diamond was the cause now you have made the claim. Let's send your compound directly to a material analysis company and we will post the results here. On my shipping account.

Any pictures of mirror damage on you IHS?

Send your sink to me for analysis on my shipping account for analysis and I will replace it even though IC Diamond was not the cause of your damage.

Click to expand...

To be honest, if we are at the point where you disbelieve claims of damage etc and need members who say they have used your compound to have "proof" .... what is the point in continuing with this thread, all we are going to end up with is a group of those who have had no issues..... and a group who have... with all of them sending you their coolers, so what do they do, go without a PC for a few weeks whilst you investigate your own product, seems to me that the whole point of having a thread here is to test and report, not have to defend oneself for saying that things didn't work out for some.

As a side note..... I have used your product and have no issues thus far, my concerns however are for the community, and even if they are a minority, the ones who "may" have had a negative experience having to prove they have, little point IMO of a feedback thread if it's not beleived.

To be honest, if we are at the point where you disbelieve claims of damage etc and need members who say they have used your compound to have "proof" .... what is the point in continuing with this thread, all we are going to end up with is a group of those who have had no issues..... and a group who have... with all of them sending you their coolers, so what do they do, go without a PC for a few weeks whilst you investigate your own product, seems to me that the whole point of having a thread here is to test and report, not have to defend oneself for saying that things didn't work out for some.

As a side note..... I have used your product and have no issues thus far, my concerns however are for the community, and even if they are a minority, the ones who "may" have had a negative experience having to prove they have, little point IMO of a feedback thread if it's not beleived.

During the above test, was any thermal cycling done? That is, heating and cooling the test materials to simulate normal temperature fluctuations one would expect to experience during typical PC use?

Also, I did not see it mentioned the overall length of time it took to perform the test?

I am not trying to take sides here, only to understand the testing methodology and parameters.

Click to expand...

Discussion is about scratching - Time and temp are not factors. We have tested both ways raw particle and raw particle in compound if damage is to occur it occurs in the first second of pressure. end of story.

Thanks for the alternate source for the contact film I'll pass it along to the resellers

Discussion is about scratching - Time and temp are not factors. We have tested both ways raw particle and raw particle in compound if damage is to occur it occurs in the first second of pressure. end of story.

Thanks for the alternate source for the contact film I'll pass it along to the resellers

Click to expand...

What were the results you reached with the testing you did on Sneekypeet's cooler?

Discussion is about scratching - Time and temp are not factors. We have tested both ways raw particle and raw particle in compound if damage is to occur it occurs in the first second of pressure. end of story.

Thanks for the alternate source for the contact film I'll pass it along to the resellers

Click to expand...

My apologies, I misunderstood.

My presumption was that there was a concerted effort to determine whether the product caused pitting as a result of some as of yet unknown reaction, as well as the scratching and/or staining issue(s).

Consequently, I would inquire if you are planning to conduct further testing to address those other issues not covered by the previous test?

Because i was asked to spread it, but again you keep twisting things in your head.

And i know next comes, "you didn't find particles either did you?" To which my response is still the same, YOUR PASTE IT TOO DAMN THICK TO TELL!!!!

Also a TIM that needs special care to remove, your own guy says it strips the lettering off, and then you do some lame ass pressure test and "specially remove" the TIM to prove your own guys story a lie? Or was there another point to your madness?

Also I do have your other two tubes of TIM, but who is to say you will give me the right address this time, or not just blame Fed Ex for you losing my things?